PDA

View Full Version : Anibal looking for 6/90



Willihammer
11-09-2012, 09:59 AM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/11/anibal-sanchez-wants-six-year-90mm-contract.html

MLBTR thinks the deciding factor could be whether 6th year is guaranteed,

gunnarthor
11-09-2012, 10:04 AM
I really want Sanchez so I'd do it but no one is ever going to be dumb enough to make me a GM. If Sanchez breaks down like Santana did, it'll be a horrible deal.

Twins Twerp
11-09-2012, 10:15 AM
Haha, 6 years. You lost me at and TR at multiple years. I could see going 3-4 years for a pitcher in free agency, but six is stupid. I don't think anyone, except a hometown hero who plays a premium position and is a sure fire hall of famer, is worth 6 years. Especially with the frequency of Tommy John surgeries nowadays.

ThePuck
11-09-2012, 10:18 AM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/11/anibal-sanchez-wants-six-year-90mm-contract.html

MLBTR thinks the deciding factor could be whether 6th year is guaranteed,

Absolutely ridiculous. I'm gonna laugh at the team that does that...he's a good pitcher, but not worth THAT kind of money

Brock Beauchamp
11-09-2012, 10:41 AM
Yeah, not so much. Anything over four years is a mistake when acquiring a pitcher, especially this offseason where there are so many quality arms to be had.

kab21
11-09-2012, 10:41 AM
I think Anibal is going to be the 2nd highest paid pitcher this offseason. I have him pegged at around CJ Wilson's contract last year (5/75) so this isn't surprising. And I had already crossed him off my wishlist.

Brock Beauchamp
11-09-2012, 10:42 AM
I think Anibal is going to be the 2nd highest paid pitcher this offseason. I have him pegged at around CJ Wilson's contract last year (5/75) so this isn't surprising. And I had already crossed him off my wishlist.

Yep, I had pretty much crossed him off. He hasn't proven enough in the AL to warrant even five years, in my opinion. At least Wilson had years under his belt of pitching half his games in Arlington and against American League offenses.

John Bonnes
11-09-2012, 10:47 AM
I feel a little bad about our estimate in the Handbook right now, which is quite a bit lower. But the reason it was lower is interesting, especially given this report...

It's because the initial writeup of him was done at the end of August. And at that point, his time with the Tigers was a big question mark. He really struggled early with them, his numbers were down, and initially we wondered if he wouldn't need to sign a "make good" deal to show he was healthy or could pitch in the AL. Then he finished strong, seemingly answered those questions and became everyone's darling. We revised our estimate when the season was over, but it still weighed down the number a little bit.

I just think it's interesting that a small number of starts - just eight - can change the paradigm or story, and suddenly the guy is guaranteed tens of millions of more dollars. Teams really are fishing in the dark on a lot of this stuff.

sorney
11-09-2012, 10:59 AM
I feel a little bad about our estimate in the Handbook right now, which is quite a bit lower. But the reason it was lower is interesting, especially given this report...

It's because the initial writeup of him was done at the end of August. And at that point, his time with the Tigers was a big question mark. He really struggled early with them, his numbers were down, and initially we wondered if he wouldn't need to sign a "make good" deal to show he was healthy or could pitch in the AL. Then he finished strong, seemingly answered those questions and became everyone's darling. We revised our estimate when the season was over, but it still weighed down the number a little bit.

I just think it's interesting that a small number of starts - just eight - can change the paradigm or story, and suddenly the guy is guaranteed tens of millions of more dollars. Teams really are fishing in the dark on a lot of this stuff.


This probably shows why quality pitchers are such a scarce commodity....8 starts and GM's are drooling over themselves.

iastfan112
11-09-2012, 02:00 PM
Worth mention it's what he's looking for, not necessarily what he'll get, Edwin Jackson wanted a multiyear deal last year and no one sprang for that. I see teams shying away from offering that many years with his injury history. The 15 million per year wouldn't surprise me at all but I see a 4 year deal as much more likely, perhaps an option for a 5th year.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
11-09-2012, 03:48 PM
This guy has to be nuts! 6/90? No way an injury prone pitcher who has around a 4 ERA in the NL? No thank you. 3 years 24 million is more like it.

Thrylos
11-09-2012, 05:30 PM
Good luck. Maybe 3/40. Maybe. More like 3/30-35

Twins Twerp
11-09-2012, 05:51 PM
I am looking for a 5 year 6 million dollar deal to coach another elementary basketball job.

minn55441
11-09-2012, 05:53 PM
I guess he wanted to start his opening negotiation price a little on the high side. I can't imagine a team offering even close to that in years or dollars.

kab21
11-09-2012, 08:05 PM
This probably shows why quality pitchers are such a scarce commodity....8 starts and GM's are drooling over themselves.

I think the reverse is true. Some were pointing to his early struggles as a reason that he wouldn't be successful. Both are small sample size. The fact is that he's been good (not great) and he hasn't missed a start in 3.5 yrs. He's also the youngest FA pitcher available this offseason. the only argument that people really have is this AL/NL thing and I think people completely blow that out of proportion.

Thrylos
11-09-2012, 08:31 PM
the only argument that people really have is this AL/NL thing and I think people completely blow that out of proportion.

ok. Any evidence to suggest that NL pitchers can be as successful in the AL?
I can throw over a slew for the other way. Mater of fact, when I am trying to evaluate NL performance for SPs and try to translate it to AL performance, I start with a factor of about 1.2 for most metrics...

Fire Dan Gladden
11-09-2012, 08:35 PM
Nope. 3/30 is as high as I would go for him.

beckmt
11-09-2012, 10:06 PM
If he gets 6 years for 90 this market is out of whack. 3 - 4 years is the max I would pay for a pitcher that rates to be a #2 or #3 starter. It may be that $15 mil a year may be standard.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
11-09-2012, 10:16 PM
In other news, Gerald Laird looking for 5 years/50 million.

kab21
11-10-2012, 12:14 AM
the only argument that people really have is this AL/NL thing and I think people completely blow that out of proportion.

ok. Any evidence to suggest that NL pitchers can be as successful in the AL?
I can throw over a slew for the other way. Mater of fact, when I am trying to evaluate NL performance for SPs and try to translate it to AL performance, I start with a factor of about 1.2 for most metrics...

Yeah I remember your adjustments. it was something like subtract 1.5 K/9 and add 1 BB/9. There should be an adjustment but these numbers are completely ridiculous. NL pitchers don't become pumpkins when they move over to the AL and AL pitchers don't become aces when they do it.

USAFChief
11-10-2012, 12:41 AM
The difference between pitching in the AL and pitching in the NL is the designated hitter.

One out of roughly every 9 hitters is different. Instead of pitching to a pitcher, you're pitching to an actual hitter. In some cases, a very good hitter. (It's not actually 1 of every 9, since sometimes the pitcher is pinch hit for in the NL, making the difference a little less that 1 in 9.)

If you look at history, it works out to something around 0.25 of ERA, although the gap has been trending down for a while now.

It's a factor, but not that much of one. And in any case, since we're talking about different run environments in the different leagues, how a pitcher compares to the other pitchers in his own league is way more important than how he compares to pitchers in the other league.

On average, every pitcher will give up more runs in the AL than if he were in the NL. It doesn't matter, since you're only trying to beat the teams in your own league for a playoff spot, and their pitchers will be pitching against mostly AL teams as well. What matters is how a pitcher compares to the pitchers in his own league.

Add a quarter of a run to a guys ERA if he's coming over from the NL as some sort of "close enough WAG", and then decide what that's worth.

Brock Beauchamp
11-10-2012, 01:06 AM
Without researching it, the number seems like it'd be higher than .25 runs. But I don't think it's enough to make or break a guy like Sanchez. League doesn't matter; the guy is simply not worth that kind of money.

iastfan112
11-10-2012, 01:34 AM
Without researching it, the number seems like it'd be higher than .25 runs. But I don't think it's enough to make or break a guy like Sanchez. League doesn't matter; the guy is simply not worth that kind of money.

15 million per year isn't that outrageous, he's been roughly 4 win player for the past 3 years and is under the age of 30 so aging isn't a huge factor. However, I don't see 6 years happening f non ace, much less a guy with Sanchez's injury history.

kab21
11-10-2012, 01:43 AM
Without researching it, the number seems like it'd be higher than .25 runs. But I don't think it's enough to make or break a guy like Sanchez. League doesn't matter; the guy is simply not worth that kind of money.

The main takeaway assuming you are talking about the overall dollars due to 6 years. In the best case he'll earn the contract but most likely he'll disappoint.

Brock Beauchamp
11-10-2012, 10:59 AM
Yeah, talking overall dollars due to length of contract, not the per year rate.

johnnydakota
11-10-2012, 11:21 AM
you remembering to factor in salary inflation?and remember we are paying blackburn 5.5 not to pitch?but totaly agree that its the lenght of the contract maybe needs to be 4 years with vesting for year 5 and 6? but signing sanchez and trading for shields is a great start to building a rotation if you ask me

USAFChief
11-10-2012, 01:10 PM
Without researching it, the number seems like it'd be higher than .25 runs. But I don't think it's enough to make or break a guy like Sanchez. League doesn't matter; the guy is simply not worth that kind of money.

"Worth it" is sort of in the eye of the beholder. It's likely few, if any, FA pitchers will end up actually worth the money, particularly those on the higher end of the ability scale.

If "worth that kind of money" is the criteria, then we all need to accept the fact the Twins aren't going to sign anything outside of low risk, low reward scrap heap lotto tickets.

I doubt Sanchez is going to get 6 years guaranteed, but if that's the price, either compete in that arena or quit pretending you're interested in exploring all options to improve your rotation. Sanchez would likely be the opening day starter for the Twins in 2013. That's the very definition of improving your rotation.

Brock Beauchamp
11-10-2012, 01:26 PM
Without researching it, the number seems like it'd be higher than .25 runs. But I don't think it's enough to make or break a guy like Sanchez. League doesn't matter; the guy is simply not worth that kind of money.

"Worth it" is sort of in the eye of the beholder. It's likely few, if any, FA pitchers will end up actually worth the money, particularly those on the higher end of the ability scale.

If "worth that kind of money" is the criteria, then we all need to accept the fact the Twins aren't going to sign anything outside of low risk, low reward scrap heap lotto tickets.

I doubt Sanchez is going to get 6 years guaranteed, but if that's the price, either compete in that arena or quit pretending you're interested in exploring all options to improve your rotation. Sanchez would likely be the opening day starter for the Twins in 2013. That's the very definition of improving your rotation.

I guess it wouldn't hurt to throw out a 4/$52m offer but it probably wouldn't get you far.

Anything over 4/$60m does too much long term damage to payroll. It doesn't make sense for the Twins to be playing in that arena.

Seth Stohs
11-10-2012, 01:36 PM
Anibal Sanchez is the guy I've had a free agent man-crush on for the entire season. As John pointed out, when we put this together, we thought 4 years, $44 million was a good number. I'd be very comfortable with that. Also, he is one of the young free agents, so I would have no problem going to 5 years with him. I'd throw him a 5 year, $55-60 million offer. Dude is terrific. I'd MUCH rather have him than Greinke over the next five years.

kab21
11-11-2012, 08:36 PM
I guess it wouldn't hurt to throw out a 4/$52m offer but it probably wouldn't get you far.

Anything over 4/$60m does too much long term damage to payroll. It doesn't make sense for the Twins to be playing in that arena.

If the Twins do that then I'll have to read more about 'how the Twins were interested...'

notoriousgod71
11-11-2012, 09:39 PM
Not that I care if we sign Sanchez or not but eventually they're going to have to just realize that in order to get good pitchers you're going to have to pay high salaries. We have seen what a mess this team is when they go cheap on the rotation.

glunn
11-12-2012, 12:33 AM
Not that I care if we sign Sanchez or not but eventually they're going to have to just realize that in order to get good pitchers you're going to have to pay high salaries. We have seen what a mess this team is when they go cheap on the rotation.

Or they can develop prospects and trade for more prospects and make us wait a few years before they become competitive.

SpiritofVodkaDave
11-12-2012, 02:55 AM
Not that I care if we sign Sanchez or not but eventually they're going to have to just realize that in order to get good pitchers you're going to have to pay high salaries. We have seen what a mess this team is when they go cheap on the rotation.

Your best bet is to draft well, or trade for a top pitching prospect, then lock him up while he is still under team control. (see: Kershaw, Verlander, Cain, Felix, etc etc) It seems like the teams overpaying out the ass for starting pitching on the market tend to get burned more then they get rewarded.

ltwedt
11-12-2012, 08:48 AM
Geez - He's looking for 6/$90??? Yeah, well - People in hell are looking for ice water, too. But . . . maybe . . . just maybe if there are others who make deasl like the one we made with Blackie, or The Lemon it could happen!

Rosterman
11-12-2012, 10:20 AM
Just think what Francisco Liriano would be looking for if he had actually put together 8-10 really great starts for the White Sox instead of what he did.

notoriousgod71
11-12-2012, 06:06 PM
Not that I care if we sign Sanchez or not but eventually they're going to have to just realize that in order to get good pitchers you're going to have to pay high salaries. We have seen what a mess this team is when they go cheap on the rotation.

Or they can develop prospects and trade for more prospects and make us wait a few years before they become competitive.

The Twins are pretty good at that.

Top Gun
11-12-2012, 08:07 PM
We can not wait, we have to pay the price for a top 5 FA pitcher now, or the team will be shot for the next 3 years.

johnnydakota
11-12-2012, 08:13 PM
Not that I care if we sign Sanchez or not but eventually they're going to have to just realize that in order to get good pitchers you're going to have to pay high salaries. We have seen what a mess this team is when they go cheap on the rotation.

Your best bet is to draft well, or trade for a top pitching prospect, then lock him up while he is still under team control. (see: Kershaw, Verlander, Cain, Felix, etc etc) It seems like the teams overpaying out the ass for starting pitching on the market tend to get burned more then they get rewarded.

baker,blackburn , and slowey?

johnnydakota
11-12-2012, 08:15 PM
just a thought , but if the mets are looking to dump salary , why not trade hermsen and boyd for santana and 15 million?

notoriousgod71
11-12-2012, 10:14 PM
just a thought , but if the mets are looking to dump salary , why not trade hermsen and boyd for santana and 15 million?

Guerra for Santana would be sweetly ironic.